-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.5k
Remove ContainsFinalizer check before adding it ✨🐛 #4789
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
matrus2
wants to merge
1
commit into
kubernetes-sigs:master
Choose a base branch
from
matrus2:finlizer_fix
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you very much for the suggestion and for taking the time to improve the code! 🙏
The reason for keeping the original implementation as it is, is because:
Separation of concerns:
We first check if the finalizer is already present using
ContainsFinalizer
, and only attempt to add it if necessary. This makes the logic clear and avoids unnecessary operations.Efficient error handling:
By explicitly checking first, we can log and manage errors more precisely at each step, which makes debugging and monitoring easier.
Avoid unnecessary API server writes:
Updating the resource only when a change is needed helps reduce API server load, avoids unnecessary reconciliation retries, and keeps the controller efficient.
Even though
AddFinalizer
internally checks, doing the explicit check first improves clarity, and bring the above benefits which seems more aligned.For these reasons, I think it might be better to keep the original implementation as it is.
Thanks again for your contribution and for sparking this valuable discussion! 🌟
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/hold
If you do not mind, I think we should close this one as not accepted.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you for the quick and thorough review
I agree that using ContainsFinalizer and AddFinalizer together improves readability. However, I still believe the original code block is misleading and can be improved. It appears to contain dead code within the conditional block:
Since the presence of the finalizer is checked before this block (by ContainsFinalizer), the condition where AddFinalizer returns false (and thus the error logging) will never be reached. Examining the implementation of AddFinalizer confirms this, as it only appends the finalizer and returns true if it wasn't already present.
My proposal aims for a more precise approach:
This revised code explicitly checks for the finalizer's absence, logs the intention to add it, performs the addition, and then handles potential errors during the update operation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@camilamacedo86 Would you agree with this approach?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hi @matrus2
Thank you for looking into that.
Your observation seems to be accurate, and your proposal seems to solve it well. 👍
Could you please update this PR with the proposal?
Also, please ensure that you squash the commits for we have a good git history.
Thank you a lot 🥇